Much trauma is caused by unfair uses of power in groups, particularly by moderators of online communities, who often act with unfair bias. This is a place to make such cases known to try to deter them from happening.

As this affects the whole British aspie scene and its safety from unexpected predators within, it presses the question of equivalents elsewhere to the law of “adult protection” existing in Scotland since 2007. If spectrumites elsewhere perceive being less safeguarded, this case’s direct impact on you gives you grounds to demand parity.

This law is no panacea, because no law is, because of the problem of getting any law fairly enforced without the authorities having a choice at their own convenience. Vulnerable folks who the authorities have an admitted duty not to give reasonable motives for suicidality to, know that the police will often ignore things without even replying, and social work will form and follow its own view on a situation – published “adult protection” procedures envisage it doing that. As Autism Network Scotland’s book An Ordinary Life Too exposed, see chapter 12, social work itself is corrupt and has a history of wilfully obstructing action against abusive services funded by itself, even after the Fritzl cellar case whose repetition all social work corruptions make possible.

Hence fair enforcement that is genuine in keeping us safe from emotional or financial exploitation, the law’s main purposes, and without in the process handing over folks’ lives go social work, has to be pursued by citing the protection law in our direct engagements with standard of services, such as in that book and the network’s follow-up of its impact, and in the periodic autism strategy consultations like this timely present one consult.gov.scot/health-and-social-care/9d506ce6/ .

But the protection law itself is a great thing to have as back-up for demanding fairness in groups and services. It is a recognition that unfairness is a damaging and sometimes exploiting thing able to affect health or state of life. It applies to folks who have a condition that increases the possibility of being harmed, and autism always increases the susceptibility to harm from social foul play. It is also defined as applying to folks “may be unable to safeguard their well-being, rights, interests, or their property”, but that is an “or” list, not an “and” list, it means any one of those things applying, not all of them. An able aspie who is fully able to run their own life, including property and “interests”, is still covered on safeguarding their wellbeing in the social context of relations, taking advantage of, pushing around, because with their aspieness they can’t interact skilfully or think of smart things to say quickly.

Thus IF UNCORRUPTLY ENFORCED it prevents other aspies from backstabbing or betraying us in the middle of supporting us, and ties to that standard all organised groups and societies of aspies. Uncorruptly enforced is what is formally put to the autism strategy consultation – A NOTICE OF HARM AND RISK, UNDER THE VULNERABILITY LAW, for all spectrumites affected by the case of these 3 jerks, CITING THAT ONLY WITH AUTOMATIC PROSECUTION OF ANYONE WHO BEHAVES LIKE THEM ARE ALL ASPIES SAFE FROM HARM UNDER THE VULNERABILITY LAW.

That is both for the blatant breaches of personal support trust, and for the sweeping exclusions done to most of an asperger society, in their actions.

3 aspies were the 3 officeholders, chair, secretary, treasurer, of an asperger society, only 6 months ago, and for 9 years past. They were active and keen in making countrywide links, joining up the British aspie scene, giving aspies in other locations solidarity with troubles, and proud of their society’s success as a model for others to follow. All 3 simultaneously, acting together, have left the society they used to run, cut off the whole rest of its membership, exposing that they had not genuinely cared for them all along, and abandoned that cause of national joining up. In the process they changed a regular meet of that society into their own meet held in secret locations openly hidden from the rest of that society’s members.

Everyone in the whole British aspie scene who had made links with them, received any hospitality from them, has now found they were predated on. They are kicked away with no trustability of any solidarity or links experienced before. Wherever in Britain they were, if what these have done to them is defined in Scottish terms it is that they have brushed aside that vulnerability law’s applying to them, trampled all over it.

Mark Keenan

Gerry Duffy

James Dick

And why did they choose to do this to the WHOLE British aspie scene? Because Keenan was present when one other person was treated nastily by an ex-workmate who made a malicious accusation. Because he decided to Judas on the other person to keep himself out of any trouble, and even after the accusation was easily proved false (hence it was a crime to make it), corruptly decided to refuse to withdraw the improper apology he had made to the villain dissociating himself from the victim. Which is an illegal breach of a support role entered into. For which these other 2 characters could have supported that whole aspie society by turning on him for it. Instead, after months of tension, they (+1 other) chose to join him in turning on the society and doing a runner on it.

Abandoned all they had worked for for years, abandoned the national Asperger scene and its interests and development, to run away from having to handle one personal incident fairly. Their names will be dung in the British aspie scene’s posterity, representing unethical unreliability and fly-by-night self interest.

Folks can come to seem like trustable reliable figures in even the nationally joined up aspie scene, over years, yet turn out, to the scene’s surprise, to be just fairweather activists, able to throw the lot away in an instant. So don’t leave it to trust. For all our safetys, including safety from suicide triggering of suicides by dirty dropping of support, agree with pinning into place committal legal deterrents to conduct like theirs.

The whole linked up British aspie scene.
14 Nov 2017

They stand reported, by protection law report made within a submission to the strategy process as linked above, and cited in it as proof that by duty against suicide dangers, enforcement of a protection law standard against their actions IS IN FACT AN AUTOMATIC DUTY AND NOT DISCRETIONARY. SUICIDE ENDANGERMENT BEING COMMITTED BY ANY PARTY WHO TRIES TO CLAIM OTHERWISE. This makes part of the autism strategy that the protection law authorities get their hands forced and don’t get left having any discretionary choice. Now this gets referred to everywhere that there is any protection ethic to cite and any engagement with the autism strategy, until they are stuck with everyone visibly knowing A LIABILITY FOR THEM THAT THEY CAN’T AFFORD, of both risking suicidality and giving it a motive, unless they comply with the forcing of their hands and adopt the principle of AUTOMATIC action.

An item that forces this question for the safety of spectrumites outside Scotland, is that endangerment is done in the Aspie Village site unless Duffy automatically is removed from being one of its moderators.

“I have been in autism circles on the Internet for 10 years. I am aware of your beliefs and concerns.” When you receive that as a sum total reply, you know they are saying they are not going to do anything. You know it’s a refusal, proclaimed arbitrarily and not even reasoned to you. Effectively it admits already knowing that anything needs doing, and admits already not doing it.

It came from Barbara Jacobs, who you may have heard of from the book Loving Mr Spock. She answers for Autistic Intelligence. In messaging AI I had asked who was responsible for its site content, and out of their list of speakers I had guessed it might be her from the Barbara signature on the message of self-doubting crisis for AI that was the latest post in its blog section.

She had even posted there a feeling of self-doubt by AI at present and it not doing much. “We can’t put on the big conferences, because they cost our delegates more money than they have. They’re a nightmare to organise as I (Barbara) am a one-woman band, not an organisation or a ‘charity’ with tax-free status, donations, funding for overheads and some sponsorship for conferences”. So a shoestring cottage industry putting on a facade of grandeur, all along. Oh dear.

Why then does she want to damage AI and have it seen to be in the wrong towards maltreated children, aspies among them? The thing she is motivelessly refusing to do, by this rude one-liner, is – SIMPLY – SIMPLY – tell the readers of AI’s site that wronged destroyed child authors exist. That’s all! It’s so simple, it’s so easy to do. It’s just one extra fact to slip into the site.

It is made necessary by the presence on the site of a profile of Luke Jackson, as one of their list of speakers. So long as the existence of wronged child authors is not in prominent general public knowledge, an additional hammering of abused kids is done every time any autism organisation ever tells the public about a child author success, but does not also tell them that there are wronged child authors. The way AI’s site is now doing this is exceeding even the boundaries of cruelty to abused kids reached before by all the fervour around Luke back in 2002-3 . It is explicitly crediting him with winning “the TES child author award.”

There is no award called a “child author award.” In 13 years Luke’s award has never been called this by anyone before. It is directly a child abuse and child cruelty towards every kid, uncounted in number, who is suffering the ATROCITY of destruction of a child author chance by school homework or by any oppressive power behaviour of adults, and to every adult survivor of this, to credit a “child author award” to any trumpeted public figure on a pedestal without lifting a finger to say a single peep anywhere about wronged child authors. If Jacobs is aware of this she is aware it’s wrong to do it.

It is worse to do it around Luke than anyone else, for the “child author” credit is not accurate! The book he got an award for in 2003, Freaks Geeks and Asperger Syndrome, his mother Jacqui told the Times on 16 Aug 2002 was more her work. Luke denied on a now defunct forum site in 2004 that the report was accurate in its quote: that Jacqui did 6 hours’ work to every half hour Luke did, which would make the book 12/13 by the adult parent. But the fact was repeated in several profiles of them, that Luke only produced unformed unordered writings which took Jacqui’s intervention of editing and formatting to make into a book, in the case of both the books credited to him. THAT MEANS HE NEVER PRODUCED ANY BOOK WRITTEN UNAIDED AS A CHILD AT ALL !!!

(Their first short book, on GFCF diet, even contained several chapters credited to Jacqui despite bending the book’s PR by crediting only Luke as its author on the front cover.) Yet there remains a PR industry, reviving now, who it profits to make him the most feted supposed child author in history. And why do they always determine to do it completely ignoring stepping over and spitting on the cruel child abuse issue of wronged child authors? If it increases their profits to make Luke sound more outstanding by minimising the number of child authors known, by choosing not to help the wronged but to kick us all back into the gutter, then THOSE ARE BLOOD PROFITS FROM OTHER CHILDREN’S BACKS. And all the time, the answer to avoid that is utterly simple. Simply tell the public that we exist.

Simply tell their readers that we exist.

That is what AI has chosen not to do even after I stood outside its conference at Dalmuir near Glasgow on 2 Mar 2015, for 7 hours under bursts of hail and sleet, showing all-comers a placard “Jacqui Jackson events should tell you there are aspie child authors whose chance to write books was destroyed by abusive school homework – I was one.”

As I repeated in my recent contact with AI: my campaign has always acknowledged that Luke should have been allowed to put out an unaided book if he wanted to, it does not dismiss that he would have had the ability to. Raising that question is valuable because it brings him down to a level closer to where the wronged are, instead of on a pedestal. But knowing, from the forum denial, that the question is potentially hurtful to him, I had told AI: “The hurtfulness of pointing out this fact can be avoided and not done if wronged child authors get treated equitably. ” But as long as we are being oppressed and HURT by non-recognition, the campaign for our just cause must be helped and evidenced by citing available facts that help it, and that includes these public facts about the Jacksons. It follows: I’m willing civilly to wipe from this page every mention of Luke not being an unaided child author, as soon as AI puts even a brief, but of fair prominence, mention of wronged child authors onto its site.

Until then, would you want to pay to go to any of AI’s events? Knowing that it has pushed aside rudely a population group of cruelly suffering maltreated wronged kids, with neither the accountability of a stated reason, nor any logical motive?

Maurice Frank
25 May 2016

At Apr 2017: less than a year after posting the above, some of us noticed that Autistic Intelligence has vanished. No explanation to be found of why.
What a conceit by Luke Jackson, on his own blog, calling himself “world renowned” !?!?! Nobody else calls him that.

So even as we make this new home for this project of fairness watch, there is admin-endorsed crowd psychology going on in an aspie forum site, resulting from a fault in receipt of a private message between members – that was actually about a contribution to this project about a problem elsewhere!!

Asperclick had seemed a successful relaxed forum, until in recent months it has become swamped by frequent arguments. There are only a few members who argue obsessively but they keep swamping other members’ topic threads with it. This is a forum with sensitive members, and affected by suffering the tragic suicide of a member, known as In Dubio Veritas. That makes it a site responsible to avoid giving members despairing feelings. Yet –

An admin called Spiderman0_2 has openly committed the bullying tyrannical conduct of giving his backing to 2 members who picked an argument with another and swamped a thread with 3 days of constant repetitive hammering abuse of one other member, and pursued it into another thread too. The 2 culprits (whose usernames I will give if there is a finally unjust outcome) have been frequently filling threads with their own bickerings, it’s even open 0n site in the thread “Moving Forward” that they annoyed the site’s owner by it just 10 days before.

Yet Spiderman0_2 upheld them, in pitching in to this one other member in this intensive way, and entirely blamed the victim for its occurrence, openly in front of vulnerable sensitive members. He upheld their absurd condemnation of the victim for making a couple of small scale efforts in the forum to alert the private message’s sender to the late receipt. Obviously the victim could not be confident that his reply message would be received as a private message, so he had to do it by posting the alert in threads where the member he wanted to reach was active. The threads could have continued perfectly undisrupted, indeed one did.

Spiderman0_2 showed open hostility to believing that the message sending fault had existed, as if irrationally defensive about its occurrence even though no one was blaming the site for it. He ranted that nobody else had suffered it, in a way that would frighten into silence any other members who wanted to report that they had suffered it. Seeing how savagely and corruptly the one had been treated. Yet Spiderman0.2 himself had started a topic about another technical fault – lots of technical faults going on, you see – to do with “signatures” under members’ posts. In that topic it was proved that some members had suffered an unpredictably fluctuating fault. Their posts saying so were already there! when Spiderman0.2, failing to read them! – posted a biased aggressive rant to his victim saying there were no unpredictably changing faults, and counting this as an argument against believing in the messaging fault! This is what an arrogant roughshodly hasty closed minded fact-bending bully he is.

This article www.psychcentral.com/news/2014/10/13/suicidal-thoughts-10-times-more-likely-in-adults-with-aspergers/76016.html on suicide cited it being 10 times more likely in adults with Asperger’s. It referenced a study by the Autism Research Centre at Cambridge, published 2014 in The Lancet Psychiatry, evidencing this. – “Survey data was used on 256 men and 118 women who were diagnosed by a clinician with Asperger’s syndrome between 2004 and 2013 in England. Any depression, suicidal thoughts, or plans were recorded on a self-report questionnaire, along with self-reported autistic traits and empathy. Two-thirds (66 %) of the respondents reported thoughts, 35 % reported plans or attempts, 31 % reported depression.

Compared with the general population, adults with Asperger’s syndrome were nearly 10 times more likely to report suicidal thoughts. They were also significantly more likely to have these thoughts than people with 1, 2, or more medical illnesses, or people with a psychotic illness.”

Simon Baron-Cohen was quoted as a co-author of the research: “Adults with Asperger’s syndrome often suffer with secondary depression due to social isolation, loneliness, social exclusion, lack of community services, underachievement, and unemployment. This study should be a wake-up call for the urgent need for high quality services, to prevent the tragic waste of even a single life.“

Asperclick is a community tragically impacted by this already. From which you would expect its folks to have a higher sense of the need to be a fair safe space. Yet anyone who sides with the 2 quarrel pushers and Spiderman0_2 creates exactly these conditions described by Baron-Cohen towards tragic outcomes.

At present it is a socially unsafe space. If Spiderman0_2 stands as winning, any autism service or worker or group friend who points anyone towards Asperclick points them towards risks of suicidal outcomes – which of course is a suable wrong to do. Any autistic forum where crowd psychology batters reason with admin’s indulgent approval openly proclaimed onsite, is an emotional risk and a despairing self-harm risk, to every member at all levels of vulnerability.

Only if and when Asperclick’s leadership repudiate Spiderman0_2’s actions, act to prevent their repetition, and take the side of the member who these 3 piled into, will it become a safe place to point anyone to.

A promise of a response was made by the site owner on Nov 18. It is still awaited. This is absolutely classically how web forums turn into corruptly working tyrannies. You can have no confidence in the fair running of any site, or any activity ever, where you get told to hold your tongue about a fairness issue while awaiting a promised answer – then the answer never comes.

Tern

19 to 28 Nov 2015

3 years on, the promised answer has still never come. Meanwhile I can rightly report dissuading some other folks from joining Asperclick.